Politics is about persuading voters about priorities.
To do so, facts are important, but they can also be misused in an attempt to win the debate.
Here the facts fight back. This site presents the facts to help keep the debate clean and to persuade politicians and others to stick to the facts.

Are Hockey’s job numbers correct? > Check the facts

Over the last couple of months we have had some very pleasing economic information. Importantly, since the beginning of this year nearly 163,000 new jobs have been created, an average of 23,000 new jobs per month—23,000 new jobs per month. When Labor left office they were averaging 3,600 jobs per month. Last month Australia created 38,500 new jobs—more than 10 times the number of jobs created in one month than what Labor achieved on average every month in their last year in government.

Since the beginning of the year nearly 163,000 new jobs have been created at an average of 23,000 new jobs per month

When Labor left office they were averaging 3,600 jobs per month for the last 12 months of office

Last month Australia created 38,500 new jobs which is more than 10 times the number of jobs created when compared to the avenge number of jobs created in the last 12 months of Labor’s time in office

Claim 1

The ABS shows that since the beginning of the year (January 2015 to July 2015), 162,900 jobs have been created which is an average of 23,300 jobs per month. So the Treasurer is correct.

Claim 2

The ABS shows that in Labor’s last year of office (September 2012 to August 2013) employment grew by 106,500 which is an average of 8,900 jobs per month. So the Treasurer’s claim that the average was 3,600 is wrong.

Claim 3

In the latest month (July 2015) 38,500 jobs were created. This represents about 4.3 times more jobs that the average number of jobs created each month in Labor’s last year in office. The Treasurer is correct about the most recent months data on jobs created but he is wrong about it being 10 times that under Labor in their last year in office.

It is important to think about the usefulness of comparing one month’s jobs data with the average amount of jobs created over a year. Month to month data changes quite dramatically. For example while the most recent month recorded an increase in jobs of 38,500, just three months earlier in April 2015 the ABS recorded a fall in jobs of 8,500.

When monthly numbers jump around it is more sensible to look at averages over a longer time period. In the 1 year and 11 months the Coalition has been in office employment has increased by an average of 15,400 jobs per month. In the 5 years and 9 months Labor was in office employment increased by an average of 13,100 jobs per month. It should be noted that Labor’s time in office coincided with a global recession.

This shows us that employment growth is broadly similar. But employment growth is only one part of the story. Unemployment is also very important. If we look at unemployment over the period the Coalition has been in government, it has increased by an average of 4,400 per month. Under Labor it has increased by an average of 3,000 per month. Again Labor achieved this during a world recession.

The findings

Cherry picking one month and comparing it to a yearly average is not an informative way to look at the labour market in Australia. This comparison is made worse by the fact that Mr Hockey got his figures wrong and his main ‘10 times better than Labor’ figure is incorrect.

Over the longer term, employment growth has been marginally higher under the Coalition than in Labor’s last term of government, but so has growth in unemployment.

These kinds of glib comparisons do little to inform the public on the state of the Labor market.

5 Responses

PeterAugust 18, 2015 at 8:18 pm ·

So you’re saying we should concentrate on the fact that the monthly average for this year is almost 3 times the average for the last year of the previous government? They must be doing something right.

PeterBAugust 22, 2015 at 11:49 pm ·

No they are saying you should concentrate on more than the short term period.

It is an old trick to cherry pick the time period, both when and for how long, and not compare like with like.

It is also normal for people to only listen to what they want to hear and ignore everything else.

Which explains gambling, drink driving, smoking, bad food, religion and all the many poor decisions people make in life.

Politics of course just is all the poor decisions gathered into one.

PeterAugust 23, 2015 at 11:01 pm ·

If you look at the full data stream the number of employed people in Australia rose at a constant rate from 2010 to mid 2014. From that point it kicks up, so any way you look at it jobs growth is stronger now than it has been at any time in the last 5 years. My point is that even though Hockey is gilding the lily, the real situation is still better than the previous government managed.”Over the longer term, employment growth has been marginally higher under the Coalition than in Labor’s last term of government, but so has growth in unemployment.” the author.This statement ignores the fact that the rate of increase in employment is trending up and that for unemployment is trending down. There’s a lot more to statistical analysis than the averages and the author is just a guilty of cherry picking.

Matt GrudnoffAugust 24, 2015 at 10:39 pm ·

There is no cherry picking. The post includes the average jobs growth for the entire term of the previous Labor government as well as the average jobs growth for the entire term of the current government. That is the entire series is considered. Also unemployment is not trending down. rather it is still trending up. To find an unemployment rate higher than the current rate you have to go back to 2002, 13 years ago.

PeterAugust 26, 2015 at 1:41 am ·

I didn’t say unemployment was trending down, I said the rate of increase is trending down meaning it either has or will soon reach it’s peak. As a percentage of the population it probably has reached its peak. It was supposed to peak at 6.5% in Q4 this year but didn’t reach the 6.4% prediction for Q3 yet. Seeing as how you like averages 6.3% is still below the long term average of 6.9%.http://www.tradingeconomics.com/australia/unemployed-persons
Last 12 months lower gradient than previous 2 years.

Why

Between elections governments are held to account through debate. This debate takes place in the parliament, media, in workplaces, at BBQs and parties, around the kitchen table and online.Politicians, pundits and interest groups attempt to influence the debate and persuade us which side of the debate to take.

.

Should the Australian government encourage renewable forms of energy or do we need to support fossil fuels? Is returning the budget back to surplus the number one priority and if so should be decrease spending or increase revenue? Should we focus on industrial relations or indigenous recognition?

.

There are, of course, no right answers to such questions. But to use the complexity of a policy issue to cloud debate with half-truths and misrepresentation of the facts to win the debate undermines the democratic accountability of government.

.

The media plays an important role in presenting an even handed account of the debate and ensuring a range of voices are heard. In turn politicians are keen to influence the debate through the media's reporting. Undue influence risks silencing some voices from the debate.
As the political debates continue Facts Fight Back will provide a timely and accessible source of information to help keep the debate clean and and ensure the public, journalists and the politicians themselves keep track of who is sticking to the facts.